93

Substantial Acts: From Materials

to Meaning in Upper Paleolithic
Representation
Randall White
Department of Anthropology
New York University
25 Waverly Place
New York, NY 10003
"What does it mean"? This is at one and the same time the most frequently asked
and the most naively conceived question asked ofUpper Paleolithic representations.
No a11 historian trained in the past two decades would ask this question of a Van Gogh
or a Picasso. Why then have generations of prehistorians treated entire corpora ofPa-
leolithic representations as if a single meaning and motivation lay behind them? Ex-
amples are numyrous: Female sculptures as fe11ility figures; painted and engraved
animals as instruments of hunting magic; geometric signs as markers of ethnic iden-
tity and/or as the painted equivalents of gendered articles of speech.
The worst and most pervasive misconception is not even formulated as a question
but as an assumption embedded in the very te1m "Paleolithic art." Conkey and I have
loudly and frequently decried the use of the concept "art," because of its status as an
historical artifact of the later stages of the so-called Western tradition. Indeed, 20th
century usage of the term "art" bears almost no relation to the Latin concept of "ars,"
which integrated the domains that we distinguish as " att' ' and "savoir-faire."
Any thorough treatment of the anthropological literature on cultural esthetics
makes cl ear the wide diversity of cosmologies, philosophies and social contexts that
underpin what we generalize as "art." I prefer the term "representation," which has a
wide and theoretically complex usage in anthropology. Thus representations can take
many forms , can have widely differing underlying logics, can be diversely motivated;
and, importantly, many representational media do not even operate in the visual/for-
mal channel.
This understood and accepted, we can forsake a focus on the origins of "a11" or
"the arts," which have enormous, but highly ethnocentric, cultural value. Rather we
can redefine what occurs at the beginning of the Upper Paleolithic as the invention of
material forms of representation (White 1992). Such an approach has the additional
advantage of allowing us to expand outward from graphic imagery to include, for ex-
Beyond Art: Pleistocenl! Image am/ Symhol Memoirs of the Califomia Academy of Sciences
r .J: .. _ 'o r- - ' - A C' (T._ J"'\ P. X I r: 1'\!,,...-, h .,. ,..")l. r r. r. ., .-i,..,ht fi'\ 1007
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
\
(
(
(
(
(
(
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
94 WHITE
ample, the representational domain of personal adornment, a critical area of study in
anthropological analyses of meaning, value and social identity.
It is my position here that by asking, "What does it mean?'' or even the somewhat
less anthropologically objectionable, "What purpose does it serve,?" and by conceiv-
ing Upper Paleo] ithic representations as "a11" in our sense, we have prevented a seri-
ous treatment of meaning(s). How then do we reconceptualize our subject matter, our
notion of meaning and, more how do we operationalize these new con-
ceptions in real archaeological research? My answer to thi s latter question is to focus,
literally, on how meaningful representations are/were const111cted, what I have de-
scribed in the title of this paper as "substantial acts."
Technological
The tenn "technology"' has had a ve1y limited and theoretically uninteresting con-
notation in American anthropology for decades (cf Dobres & Hoffman 1994 ). Mate-
rialist frameworks such as those ofWhite (1959) and Steward (1955) left relatively
littl e room for considering tools and techniques as anything more than culturally pre-
scribed means of production. Materialist theo1y in American anthropology immedi-
ateiy before and after World Warii seems to have operated in ignorance of seminal
theoretical developments in what became European Sli11Cturalism (Mauss I 936;
Leroi-Gourhan 1943, 1945). My own orientation with respect to technology is de-
scended from that of the late Andre Leroi-Gourhan , who himsel fwas cl early inspired
by Marcel Mauss's Techniques d11 C01ps, and whose major theoretical and methodo-
logical works on technology have only begun to be translated into Engli sh (Leroi-
Gc,urhan 1993). Critical to Leroi-Gourhan ' s research design was the notion of the
chaines operatoire, which he saw as a conventionai ized, learned sequence of techn i-
cal operations implicated in all cultural production from the manufacture of stone
tools to the painting of underground cavities to the modern assembly line. These
chains were constituents of culture rather than byproducts .
At the level of individual material production episodes, these chaines operatoires
are constituted of sequences of applied techniques, which Leroi-Gourhan viewed as
th manipulation of conventional tools by means of habitual, learned gestures.
Vi ewed more broadly, chciines operatoires can be seen as organized into more en-
compass ing technical system , driven by a limited number of technical principl es.
Leroi-Gourhan clearly recognized that these underlying tpchnical systems were/are
never the only ones possible and argued that they from profound cultural
contex rs and historical/evolutionary trajectories.
For him, regional variation in underlying technical systems man if, sted itself in
what archaeologists recognize as style, which he saw as a new and revolutionary kind
of material behavior that replaced the need for regional biological diversification in
humans. A new generation of scholars of technology and material culture (Lechtman
J 971; Lemonnier 1983; Schlanger 1994) have built on the foundation constructed by
Leroi-Gourhan (cf Dobres & Hoffman 1994).
My goal here is to illustrate how detailed observation and experimentation
ai med at understanding the chaine opera to ire underlying the construction of material
representations can lead to new insights into the social, economic and ideational con-
texts of the representations themselves.
MATERIALS AND MEANING IN PALEOLITHIC IMAGES 95
Case Study I: Aurignacian I Personal Ornaments
The Sample
European sites attributed to Aurignacian I (roughly 35-30,000 BP)_have yielded
an abundance of personal ornaments in the form pendants, pterced ammal
teeth and pierced marine shells (White 1989; Tabonn 1993; Hahnl972, 1986).
where, I have explored in detail raw matenal choice and fabncat10n techniques and
the ways in which these varied across the European at the very begmnmg of
the Upper Paleolithic. It has been and it remamsmy position that thiS large corpus of
personal ornaments, following a near absence 111 the precedmg Moustenan
1995a), is reflective of significant trans fonnat10ns lll human society With the 0.1set of
the Aurignacian ometime prior to 35,000 years ago. In light of what we know genei-
ally about the social context of modern human bodily adornment, It seems
to hypothesize that the first appearance 111 thearchaeolog1ca I record oflai ge and var
ied assemblages of personal ornaments Implies the matenal constructiOn and 1 ep1 e-
sentation of a diversity of individual and social Identities.
A Schematic Chaine Operatoire for Aurignacian I Personal Ornaments
A schematic outline of the constituents of a chaine operata ire for (or
any other) system of personal ornamentation might look somethmg !Ike the follow-
ing:
I) Cultural assumptions about personhood. . . . . _
2) Beliefs about the relatiOnship between matenals, representatiOnal acts, 1epre
sentational constructs and efficacy. . .
3) Choice and acquisition (by direct extractiOn or by social mechamsms of ex-
change) of raw material based on above. .
4) Choice of forms , textures , colorsor subject matters. .
5) Organization of production, (social, temporal and spatial) . .
6) Combination of gestures and tools into for ornament production that
are coherent with the encompassmg, regional techmcal sys:ems and that enable_
7) Representation of desired signifiers of social Jdentity, age, reproductive
status,supernatural associations, ec.. . . . .
8) Use of the omamental representations m (socially, esthetically and cosmologi-
cally) meaningful acts. . . . .
9) Purposeful (based on intentions for future retneval/use or Ideas about then re-
sidual power and efficacy) or accidental (as a byproduct of human activity) di s-
posal of the ornaments. . , k .
It is important to emphas ize that, procedurally, archaeologists tend to NO . 111 re-
verse through these chains; beginning w1th basic pattern recogmt10n concern_mg the
distributi on of objects in the ground and movmg backward through multifaceted,
higher order analyses and inferences.
Formal Attributes of Beads
By far the majority of preserved personal ornaments in European Aurignacian-
age sites (White 1995b) were fabricated of1vory. Indeed, many of the famous Vogel-
herd statuettes were pierced for suspensiOn. In the Western European Aungnacian,
96 WHITE
facsimiles of red deer canines and marine shells (Figure 1) were executed in ivory (ex-
amples are also known in talc and limestone). In addition, there is a variety of more-
or-less idiosyncratic " pendants" manufactured of ivory and, less often, ofbone, antler
or talc. For reasons of space, I shall focus here on operational sequences for the mass
production of ivory "beads," giving less detail ed treatment to rarer ivory ornaments.
Two formal attributes of Auri gnacian I beads and pendants are parti cularly note-
worthy: surface luster and facsimile. First, texturally, almost all Auri gnacian I beads
and pendants exhibit remarkabl e surface luster that is not a product of postdeposi-
tional processes. The luster on ivory beads (Fi gure 2) was intentionally produced by
techniques (discussed later in thi s paper) of grinding and poli shing, especially the use
of an effective metallic abrasive, powdered ocher (hematite) .
The potenti al of ivory to take on lustrous polishes can be seen as having been ex-
ploited through the creati on and application of appropriate techniques for replicating
the naturall y occuning tactil e characteri s tics of other omamental media, such as
mother of pearl , talc/steatite and dental enamel. In other words, the poli shing of ivory
was itself a representation of textures ex peri enced elsewhere in the natural world.
Our own predominant cultural medium of representati on is visual; as a result we have
tended to treat tactil e characteri sti'cs of obj ects as nonrepresentational or minimall y
representati onal. However, a moment of refl ecti on will reveal that, even in the so-
call ed "Wes tern Traditi on," poli shed ivory's tactil e qualiti es have been so sought-
after that elephants have been brought to the verge of extinction.
The hypothes is that the poli shing of ivory was an attempt to represent the surface
qualiti es of other substances of tactil e interes t is supported by the existence in Auri g-
nacian I sites of ivory facs imil es of seas hell s (mother-of-pearl ), and animal teeth
(dental enamel and naturall y lustrous dentine). Indee.:l, the basket-s haped ivory and
FiGURE I . Three of six facsimil es ofseashcllssculpted ii] ivory from the Auri gnacian I siteof La Souquette,
France. ,.
:: : ,
MATERIALS AND MEANING IN PALEOLITHIC IMAGES 97
talc beads so frequent in SW French Aurignacian I sites (see below) show a striking
resemblance in form and si ze (size standardi zation is discussed below and has been
quantifi ed in White 1989) to a species of Mediterranean seashell found in some
Auri gnacian I sites in SE France: Cyclope neritea (Figure 3). In hght of th is hypothe-
sized tactile constituent of Aurignacian I representation, it is perhaps not surprising to
observe that more than 95% of Aurignacian I personal ornaments are constructed of
ivory, talc, shell or animal tooth.
FIGURE 2. Ivory basket-shaped bead from Abri Blanchard, France, showi ng characteri stic luster.
mm.
Scale in
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
)
98 WHITE
Regional Perspectives
The fabrication sequence (a mere fragment of the much broader and inclusive
chaine operatoire outlined above) for Aurignacian ivory and stone beads varies both
intra- and interregi onally. In France, the most common form, represented by more
than 1000 specimens, is what has been called basket-shaped beads. Found in large
quantities early in this century atAbri Blanchard, Abri Castanet, Abri de Ia Souquette,
Istu ritz and Saint Jean de Verges, these have now been radi ocarbon dated by Del porte
at Brassempouy (Delporte & Bui sson 1990) to between 33- and 32,000 years BP.
They were created (Figure 4) from pencil-like rods of ivmy or talc that were then cir-
cuminscribed and snapped into cylindrical blanks one to two centimeters long. These
were then bil aterall y thinned at one end to form a sort of stem. A perforati on was then
created at the junction of the stem and the unaltered end. Thi s was done by gouging
from each side, rather than by rotational drilling. These rough-outs were then ground
and polished into their fina l basket-shaped form using, first coarse abrasives and then
fine metallic abras ives (powdered hematite) as abras ive. My experiments indi cate
that a mean of one to two hours of labor per ivory bead and 30 minutes per talc bead
are required by thi s process. ..
Ivory beads in south Ge1man Aurignacian sites, also radi ocarbon dated to be-
tween 32- and 33,000 years BP, are substantially different, although the basic princi-
ple of reducing an ivozy baton was the same (Figure 5). In the case ofGeif3enklosterle
for example (Hahn 1986), a baton ellipti'cal in section was circumincised and
snapped. The blank was then thinned and perforated by gouging. In this case, how-
ever, two holes separated by a bulge were dug into the blank. Thi s type of bead is as
unknown in France as the basket-shaped form is in Germany,
Raw Material Choice and Acquisition
The full range of ornamental raw materials preserved in the record includes vari-
ous mineral and animal substances including limestone, schi st, talc-schist, talc, mam-
malian teeth, bone, antler and ivory, fossil and contemporary species of marine and
fresh-.vater shells, fossil coral, fossil bel emnite, jet, lignite, hemati te, and pyrite. How-
ever, this relatively extensive li st should not be taken to suggest a kind of random use
of materials encountered in the environment. A number of pronounced choices were
made.
If one examines the species of animals whose teeth were chosen for Aurignacian
objects of suspension, there are clear choices that vary somewhat regionally. In.
France, Belgium, Germany and Russia fox canine teeth predominate fo ll owed in
much small er quantities by the vestigial canines ofcervids, a[most always red deer. In
Spain and Italy, almost all pi erced teeth are vestigial canines. of red deer, with fox ca-
nines being absent. At Ml adec in Czechoslovakia, beaver inci sors dominate, closely
followed by moose and bovid incisors. In nearly all instances the species sample for
objects of s uspension is fundamentally different from that found in the food debris,
suggesting choices based on ideas exclusive of dietary preferences.
Pierced marine, freshwater and foss il shell s (Taborin 1993) constitute perhaps a
third of the objects of suspension found in French Aurignacian sites. Outside of
France, with the possible excepti on ofNorthern Italy (Bartolomei et al. 1992), they
are so rare as to be considered virtually absent in Aurignacian-age sites in Spain, Bel-
gium, Germany, Czechoslovakia, Hungary and Russia. Local marine fossils (bel em-
MATERIALS AND MEANING IN PALEOLITHIC IMAGES 99
FIGURE 3. A specimen of Cyclope neritea, closely resembling many of the Aurignacian I basket-shaped
beads. Length 6.5 mm. (CoUI1esy ofY. Taborir.).
nit e, co ral) served as raw materials for objects of suspens io n in some
Aurignacian-age sites in Russia (White 1993).
Occasional pierced objects in limestone are found throughout Europe. On the
other hand, rarer soft stones, such as talc, li gnite and hemat ite were turned into
Aurignacian-age items of suspension most often in southern France, but also occa-
sionally in Spain, Italy, and Gezmany.
Personal ornaments are freq uently manufactured of material s exotic to the
re-gions in which they are found. This is especiall y true of shells and rare mineral s,
but may also be true of ivory, since mammoth remains are virtually absent from
Aurignacian I sites (Delpech 1983) in SW France (although the collection by Aurig-
nacian people of subfossil ivory from geological sources is a distinct possibility; see
below) . In general, rare minerals in France fall off with distance from point of natural
origin. For example, talc attenuates as one proceeds north from the Pyrenees. Like-
100 WHITE
wise Atlantic and Mediterranean shell species attenuate as one proceeds into the
French interior.
Contribution of Raw Materials to Representational Form:
Mammoth-Ivory as a Raw Material
Proboscidean tusks are merely specialized teeth (upper inci sors) , and are
composed predomimite!y of dentine. In contrast to many other ivories, mammoth and
elephant tusks have a cori1plex structure (Figure 6) fom1ed by specialized cells known
as odontoblasts. These odontoblasts produce new dentine along the lining of the pulp
cavity. As new dentine is produced, the odontoblasts mi grate to the new surface of the
I
(
:. . .

-=.
.
. -
., ..
II
-
--cr. _-.::; ;[ - _ ; >-
- -
III
(a) (b) (c)



N '
..
8 8
v ..

..

0 J
I
I
2
. I
I I
=

FIGURE 4 . The production sequence for Aurignacian I basket-shaped beads.
.
I
MATERIALS AND MEANING IN PALEOLITHIC IMAGES 101
pulp cavity, leaving behind processes known as dentinal tubules (MacGregor 1985)
or so-called Hunter-Schreger bands. These "radiate outward from the pulp cavity and
incline obliquely towards the tip" of the tusk. The result, in transverse section, is a
complex three-dimensional structure (Figure 7) that takes the form of arcs running
counter to each other across the width of the tusk, and producing by their intersection
what are frequently referred to as "engine-turnings" of the Hunter-Schregerpattern.
. , . . ,, :e=:.r. ;.;e,; --.s .. . ,., .. . ., .. , .. .. - .. > , ,:
. ), .,. . . .. . : s"M ;' II . ' ;..i.!;C
III
'

Fit1isbed Produd
v
e
.
.
FIGURE 5. The production sequence for south German Aurignacian I two-holed beads (after Hahn 1986).
(
(
(
(
(
(
c
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
102 WHITE
In transverse section, this Hunter-Schreger pattern crosscuts broad concentric
rings often referred to as laminae (Figure 8). These are actually growth interfaces be-
tween superimposed cones of ivory. In living tusk, the boundari es between these
laminae are not areas of structural weakness, being bound together by the complex in-
tersecting dentinal tubules compos ing the Hunter-Schreger lines and by coll agen fi-
bers that fill the interstices between the dental tubules. However, upon desiccation
and accompanying deterioration of dentinal collagen, tusks tend to split or spa II along
these concentric boundaries, which are fa r more developed in the outer zones of the
tusk's diameter. The inner core of the tusk, in the area surroundi ng the central nerve
canal, is hi ghly compact, homogeneous and virtually immune to such spalling. As a
result, such inner ivory is exceedi ngly diffi cul t to work with stone tools. It is perhaps
no surprise then that in ivory- ri ch Aurignacian sites in SW france, this "core ivo1y" is
abundantl y represented in the waste products of tusk reduct ion.
Ivory has propert ies (color, luster, softness or warmth of touch) that set it apart
from such media as bone and antler. However, these qualities can only be reali zed by
means of polishing with fine abrasives. According to Ritchie ( 1969), modern ivory
workers prefer fine metalli c abras ives iucluding j eweler's rouge; which is nothing
more than hematite/red ocher. Indeed, SEM analysis of Aurignacian I ivory beads
(White 1995b) revealed particles of red ocher embedded in the fine pol ishing striae on
their surfaces. Moreover, large caches of red ocher have been recovered from two of
the ri chest iv01y-bearing Aurignacian sites in SW France: Abri Blanchard and Abri
Castanet (Didon 19 11; Peyrony 1935).
Tools, Techniques and Gestures: Exper imental Perspectives
My experimental research into the working of 1vory faisified several naive
misconceptions about proboscidea n tusks as raw material. My first mistake was to
presume that modern African elephant tusk was a suitable experimental analogue for
woolly mammoth tusk. Although, superficially, the differences do not appear great,
the 1:\vo fo rms of ivory exhibit qHite different fracture patterns that are the product of
signi fi cant differences in the angle of intersection ofHunter-Schreger bands (known
as Hunter-Schreger angles) .
Contrary to my ini tial pres umption, fresh tusks proved extremely difficu lt to break
into, and to reduce to usable parts . Fresh ivo1y does not fiacture along the large- sca le
concentric laminae observable in prepared secti ons, as we had so naively imagined.
or can a fresh elephant tusk be sectioned longitudi nally by beginning a spl it a1 the
thin, holl ow proximal end (pulp cavity) and propagating it toward the distal end of the
tusk.
Neither Alaskan permafrost iv01y coll ected in the 1920's, nor fresh Afii can
elephant ivory could be worked effectively by direct percussion. Attempts at direct
percussion produced the same results that one mi ght expect ofhitting a stout piece of
hardwood with a hammers tone' Indeed, there are distinct similariti es in the response
of hardwood and ivory to percussion and wedging, based upon simi larities in struc-
ture and grain. Sizable flakes were removed by percuss ion onl y where the tusk had al-
ready been partiall y spl it by desiccation.
Neither fresh nor artificially desiccated (ki ln-dried) African elephant ivory could
be worked by pii tting-and-wedging. Upon des iccation, elephant ivory developed in-
cipient concentric fractures that confonned to the broad internal laminae of the tusk.
However, these were too poorly developed _io serve as points of access for wedges.
Enamel
!Tip Onh")
MATERIALS AND MEANING IN PALEOLITHIC IMAGES
Nerve
Canal
0
'
.
FtGURE 6. The morphology of proboscidean tusks.
103
104
WHITE
Th
t. H nter Schreger bands seen here in transverse section in a late Pleistocene
FtGURE 7. e llltersec mg u -
mammoth tusk. A single desiccation fracture is seen to crosscut the bands.
FtGURE 8. Concentric desiccation laminae, s ~ in transverse section in a late Pleistocene mammoth tusk.
Note the radial fractures crosscutting the concentric desiccation fractures.
MATERIALS AND MEANING IN PALEOLITHIC IMAGES 105
Overheating in a kiln made modem elephant ivory so brittle that it was breakable by
hand, and structurally weaker than many 35,000 year-old Aurignacian artifacts.
At the time I received it, the medial segment of Alaskan permafrost mammoth tusk
showed a quite developed concentric fracture at a lamellar boundary near its external
surface. Attempts to exploit this desiccation fracture by percussion-driven wedging
from the distal extremity of this medial segment produced broad flakes that hinged
outward part way down the segment's length. However, a split could not be propa-
gated through the entire length of the segment, presumably because the lines offorce
were directed outward when they encountered the interfaces between "superimposed
cones" of ivory. With enough labor however, it is certainly possible to scrape, grind
and polish such large flakes of fresh ivory into desired forms . Thus, their employment
by Aurignacian ivory-workers cannot be entirely excluded.
In addition, the slightly desiccated Alaskan permafrost tusk showed radial
fractures that crosscut the concentric laminar fractures (Figure 8). While these radial
fractures did not provide an effective purchase for percussion-driven wedges to split
the tusk longitudinally, this is probably attributable to the extremely "fresh" state of
the permafrost tusk. Similar attempts with more highly desiccated lamellar fragments
of mammoth tusk led to considerable success in creating long, workable splinters by
longitudinal splitting and wedging.
Splitting-and-wedging constituted a fundamental Aurignacian strategy (Knecht
1993) for working organic materials, but I conclude that they are/were not especially
appropriate to the structure of fresh or even slightly desiccated proboscidean tusks.
The use ofsubfossil tusks as raw material has been hypothesized previously by Hahn
( 1986) for the German Aurignacian and by Phillipov ( 1983) for the Upper Paleolithic
of the Russian Plain. I think it nearly certain that, apart from some fotm of art ificial
drying or purposeful curing of fresh tusks, "subfossil" or at least mammoth tusks
ome years old were sought as raw material by Aurignacian ivmy workers.
Even then, the producti on of long rods of ivmy by splitting and wedging of tusks
is not suggested by the structure of ivory, and is difficult to achieve. These rods seem
to have been a preexisting goal of Aurignacian ivory workers even if they required the
solution of significant mechanical problems. My best explanation for this determina-
tion by Aurignacian I ivory workers to obtain pencil-like rods of ivory is that it is a
technique highly conducive to standardization. Cylindrical rods of roughly the same
diameter lead easily to the production of standardized bead-blanks and ultimately
standardized beads. I have shown elsewhere (White 1989) the high degree of stan-
dardization in Aurignacian beads, a standardization that I believe to be motivated by
the anticipated arrangement of uniform, sewn-on beads on garments. In other words,
the visual impact of Aurignacian beads was not as individual objects, but as arrange-
ments constituted ofunifom1 elements.
Laboratoty experiments using Aurignacian blades of Bergerac flint, a fine
limestone grinding stone, powdered red ocher and liberal applications of water (es-
sential to softening and lubricating the surface of the ivory), produced stigmata and
highly polished surfaces similar to those observed on Aurignacian ivory beads. Sig-
nificantly, while most Aurignacian beads show traces of hematite, few if any of them
are profoundly stained. In my experience working pem1afrost mammoth tusk, indeli-
ble staining only occurred when powdered hematite was mixed with fat or oil. The su-
perficial nature of hematite deposits on Aurignacian beads supports the use of water
rather than fat as a softening/lubricating agent.
In my experience, there is no archaeological evidence before Sungir (dating to ca.
28-25,000 years BP or earlier) for the preparation of whole tusks by softening (heat-
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
\
(
\
(
(
(
(
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
106 WHITE
ing, boiling), which would have allowed the ivory to have been more easily worked.
Even at Sungir however, the operational chain for bead producti on (White 1993)
seems not to have employed thoroughly softened ivory. Simple soaking of tusks in
water has only superficial effects. However, once the tusk is reduced to much thinner
fTagments, such soaking can penetrate the entire thickness, making drilling, scraping
and gouging much easier. This soaking also works well on subfossi l tusk fragments.
Comparison of our experimental sample with actual Auri gnacian production debris
indicates clearly the use ofwater in the final stages of bead production.
In my experience with extant archaeological collections, there is no evidence in
the Aurignacian for the oft-cited "groove-and-splinter" technique, so common in
later periods. While grooving and splintering of fresh tusks is a feasible (if enor-
mously tedious and time-consuming) approach, the splinters that exist in Aurignacian
assembl ages show no traces ofhaving been incised out of the swface of the tusk. The
French sites that have produced the greatest quantiti es of iv01y ornaments and pro-
duction debris have yielded few significant tusk segments that might yield insight
into Aurignacian approaches to tusk reduction.
Contexts of Production, Use and Disposal
Lacking direct association between Aurignacian I beads and human skeletons, we
are obli ged to design research strategies to demonstrate first, that these were indeed
objects of suspension and second, how precisely, they were suspended. A combi ned
SEM/experi mental replication program has already yielded to us significant insight
into the attachment of Aurignacian basket-shaped beads. Sewn-on clothing beads are
implied, but there is substantial variation in patterns of wear (Figure 9) on the surfaces
of bead-hol es.
Elsewhere, I have proposed that sites where beads were manufactured in quantity
were special places on the landscape, perhaps loci of aggregations of othe1wise dis-
tant groups. This would ex plain the hyperabundance of exotic raw materials in these
sites. I have also noted that adjacent si tes show abundant but differing frequencies of
bead production stages, perhaps indi cating more complicated divi sions of labor than
previousl y imagined. There is substantial evidence that beads were worked down to a
penultimate stage (e.g., perforated but not shaped by grinding/polishing, stored as
such, and only finished at the moment at which they were to be sewn or strung). This
may have allowed the ivory worker the fl exibility to create a final product ta il ored to
the size and form requirements of the moment.
More than 25% of Aurignacian I basket-shaped beads show prehistoric breaks,
usually across the neck of the hole. This could easily be explained by beads broken off
during activity, or by the mending of garments at which time worn or bro-
ken beads may have been removed and di scarded. However, if use and maintenance
of beaded garments are suggested, so is intensive production of beads man ifest in
large quantities offabrication debri s. Caching of large numbers of beads , or even of
whole, decorated garments , cannot be excluded and might explain tpe hi gh percent-
age of intact, unbroken beads. Unfortunately, excavation techniques ea rly in this cen-
tury did not involve spatial proveniencing of artifacts; thus, spatial analysis within
sites is imposs ibl e for the moment.
MATERIALS AND MEANING IN PALEOLITHIC IMAGES 107
FIGURE 9. Wear facets on the inside of the holes of talc basket-shaped beads from Abri Blanchard, France.
(Scale in mm).
Case Study II: Gravettian Anthropomorphic Figurines
My goal in this case study is to illustrate how detail ed observation and experi-
men-tati on aimed at understanding Upper Paleolithi c fema le image production can
lead to new insights into the social, economi c and ideat ional contexts of the objects
themselves. In so doing, I seek to reemphasize (see White 1996b) and avoid some of
the dangers and mi sunderstandings evident in recent writing on the subj ect.
The Sample
I am concerned here with anthropomorphic representations, especially sculpted
figurines , traditionally attributed to the Gravett ian culture 28-22,000 years BP. In
contrast to recent American writers on the subj ect (Rice 1981; Nelson 1990) , I do not
cons ider it acceptable to treat all of Upper Paleolithic female imagery as if it were a
coherent whole. It is not
1
The Magdaleni an and the Gravettian are worlds apart in
terms of the diversity, form and context of female representati ons. However, Bisson
and others ( 1996) indicated that so-call ed Gravett ian fi gurines from Grimaldi cover a
much longer chronol ogical range. Dating problems notwithstanding, the proporti on
of decidedly pregnant fema le images differs dramat icall y between these two cultures
(Duhard 1993).
My geographic scope over the past few years has been from the Atlantic sea-
board ofF ranee to the Don Valley ofEuropean Russ ia. I have examined, with varying
degrees of precision, approximately 100 of these figurines, including those from Gri-
maldi, Savignano, Sireuil, Tursac, Abri Pataud, Trou Magrite, Willendorf, Brassem-
pouy, Lespugue, Dolni Vestoni ce, Predmosti , A vdeevo, Kostienki 1, and Gagarino.
108 WHITE
Lying behind the previous lack of recognition of differences between the Gravet-
tian and the Magdalenian are serious terminological problems that mask significant
differences in the technology of representation between the two cultures. In particu-
lar; the term "Venus," which is interpretive rather than descriptive, has been used in
such an all encompassing way as to give the illusion that the repet1oire of female im-
ages in the Magdalenian is simply a continuation of that of the Gravettian. Nothing
could be further from the truth.
My position is that descriptive terminology should be based in representational
techniques, rather than in presumed but undemonstrated function, meaning or view-
ing context. Even the terms statuette and figurine probably presume too much. Terms
such as female bas-relief in limestone, or sculpted female in ivory or woman molded
and fired in loess are preferable, in that they provide an understanding of raw mate-
rial , technique. and subject, without embedding meaning in description.
Female Representations as an Analytical Category
A ques tion never asked is whether female representations constitute a discrete,
natural category of analysis. I find it troubling that associated imagery, and its rela-
tionship to female representations is seldom examined: It is noteworthy that in evety
region in which female figurines exist in the Gravettian there are accompanying rep-
Teseritations of other subjects, from animal to geometric; and these vary greatly by re-
gion. To my knowledge, the only scholar to have addressed this question with respect
to. female figurines is Henri Delporte, who notes an association in Siberia between im-
ages of women and birds; and in France between women and bison.
Chaine Operatoire for Gravettian Female Sculptures
For our purposes, the general constituents of a chaine operatoire for female figu-
rines mi ght include the following, keeping in mind as previously stated that archae-
ologists usually address the components in reverse order:
I) Cultural assumptions about women.
2) Beliefs about the relationship between materials, representational acts, re-
pre-sentational constructs and social/supernatural efficacy.
3) Choice and acquisition of raw material.
4) Choice of subject matter.
5) Organization of production, (social, temporal and spatial).
6) Combination of gestures and tool s into for figurine production that
are coherent with the encompassing, regional technical system and that enable
7) Representation of desired signifiers of social identity, age, reproduc"tive status,
supernatural associations, etc.
8) Use ofthe female representations in (socially, esthet ically and cosmologically)
meaningful -acts.
9) Disposition of the figurines based on ideas about their residual power arid
efficacy. '
The Grimaldi Subsample
I wish now to illustrate the insight that can be gained by analyzing in detail a group
of figurines with the above operational scheme in mind. I will focus in particular on
MATERIALS AND MEANING IN PALEOLITHIC IMAGES 109
15 anthropomorphic figurines from Grimaldi (Liguria), Italy, seven of which had
never been analyzed or published (Bisson & Bolduc 1994; Bisson & White 1996). In
concluding, I will attempt to place these in a broader European context with respect to
the technology of figurine production, use and disposition.
The 15 objects (Figure 10) in question were recovered from the sites ofBarma
Grande and the Grotte du Prince between 1883 and 1895 by Louis Jullien. Presently,
seven of them are in the Piette Collection at the Musee des Antiquites Nationales at
Saint Germain-en-Laye outside Paris, one of them is in the Peabody Museum at Har-
vard, and the remaining seven are in private hands in Montreal , where Jullien emi-
grated in 1898.
Raw Materials
The sample of 15 figurines breaks down as in Table 1:
Table I The raw material breakdown for the 15 Grimaldi sculptures.
Raw Material
Fossil ivory
Bone or subfossil ivory
Light green fibrous sellJentine
Dark green fibrous sellJentine
Dark green chlorite
Yellow talc
Number of Figurines
I
2
2
5
4
I
All of the soft stone materials are from relatively local alpine sources, that is,
within 100 km from the Grimaldi sites. Hardnesses vary from 1 to 4 on the Mohs
scale. Several other objects from the Grimaldi sites, especially beads and pendants,
are manufactured in similar soft stones.lv01y and soft stone are the same materials
that dominate the sample of Gravettian female images across Europe. Although the
use of these silicates, such as talc, steatite and serpentine, can be explained by their
being relatively easy to work, they also have remarkable tactile qualities. Especially
when polished, they are indistinguishable to the touch from the warm lustrous sensa-
tion of polished iv01y. I propose that, as in the case of Aurignacian beads discussed
above, in our pursuit of the meaning ofGravettian female representations, we have
focused too little attention on carefully chosen and constructed tactile qualities that
had/have enormous evocative potential.
The ivory, constituted ofunmineralized to partially mineralized mammoth tusk,
was probably obtained from known geological exposures (Giraudi 1981, 1983).
Mammoths were not present in Italy during the Late Pleistocene, although a small
number of ivory objects, notably pendants, have been recovered from Upper Paleo-
lithic sites in Northern Italy. Exchange with groups farther north is certainly a possi-
bility.
Certain raw materials are conspicuously absent, although they are key constitu-
ents of organic and lithic tools such as spear points, awls, lamps etc. Notably, bone,
antler and limestone are absent. This severe choice may have nothing to do with
workability, as some of the substances ignored are more plastic than those chosen for
figurine production. Raw material choice may have responded to the pursuit of visual
and tactile qualities, and to the cosmology surrounding certain substances.
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(

<
(
(
(
(
110 WHJTE
MATERIALS AND MEANING IN PALEOLITHIC IMAGES Ill
a.
e.
b.
f.
Gl
d.
FIGURE I Qa-d. Fourteen of the anthropomorphic figurines from Grimaldi, Italy.
f iGURE I Oe-g.
)
112
WHITE
MATERIALS AND MEANING IN PALEOLITHIC IMAGES
1.
m.
J.
n.
k.
FIGURE I 0 1-n.
f'I GURE I Oh-k.
113
(
(
(
( '
(
(
(
I
\
(
(
(
<
(
(
(
(
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
I I
) !
) I
) I
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
) I
) I
)I
)
)
114
WHITE
Contribution of Raw Materials to Object Form
The form in which raw material was obtai1ied seems to have influenced in some
cases at least the s1ze and form of the fini shed figurines . Octobon describes an un-
worked pebble, oval in fonn and flattened in section like a skipping stone.
ThIS shapt accounts for the flattened shape of the Femme au cou pe
1
fore, le
buste, Ia figu, me aplat1e: le figure and !a doublefigurine. For example, close exam i-
natlon of Ia doublejigunne (F1gure lOa) reveals that the fissure separating the human
and the figures was a natural flaw in the stone that conditioned the desi gn of
fhe mmuscule of the Gnmald1 spec1mens would be explained i fsup-
pOI ts fo1 the remammg figurmes were as small as the pebble described by Octobon.
Formal Attributes or the Grimaldi Fiaures
b
All o: the l5 sculpted representations from Grimaldi appear anthropomorphic.
The all mventory w1th sexual/reproduct1ve attribution shows an obvious pre-
dornmance ofp1 egnant women among complete figurines (Table 2). Three of the 15
have two faces shanng the same body. ln two cases these are human heads back to
back, whlle a third juxtaposes a human head with that of an animal. The three cases of
two-faced figunnes IS, so far as I am aware, unique to "Grimaldi. It is also worth noti
1
w
that the several cases ofbiank visages are ve1y explicit; that is, faces are not simp!;
absent, empty faces are very carefully con tructed.
Tdbk 2. ex and reproduct;vc status attributions tor the 15 Grimaldi sculptures.
- SQC2inc;;----
La 7eie m>groide (bmken)
I.e Po!ichinelle
Lu Figurine non decrite (bfoken)
L "Hermaphrodite
Le. Losange
La Femme au goitre
La Statuel/e en steatitejaune
La Femme au cou pe("(ore
LC' busiC' (broken)
LP Figure (pos, ibl y animal)
!.a Figurine en il'oire bnm
Lo Figuri11e oplarie
Ln Figurine en ivoire Q I 'ocre rouge
La Fig 11rine double
La Feme lie a deux fetes
Sex St:lltl ------
--.)- --- ____ ? _____ _
F
pregnant
?
?
F
pregnant
F
pregnant
F
pregnant
F
pregnant
F
pregnant
F ')
? ?
F
pregnant
F 0
F
pregnant
F
pregnant
F
pregnant
Tools, Techniques and Gestures
. Mi croscopic and experimental analysis reveal characteristic stigmata of tech-
ntques of gougmg, abrading and incising in the production of the Grimaldi
11). fhe redundancy with which these techniques are applied con-
tJ tbutes to a remarkable consistency m breast and abdominal form, as well as hair
treatment. Techntcal dtfferences between ivoty and soft stone (chlorite/steatite/ser-
pentme) sculptmg at Grimaldi and more-or-less contemporaneous Russian sites
(where tvoty and marl predominate) could not be clearer. The Russian female ficrures
show a predominance of gouging and abrasion allowing for
smoother contours than the htghly incised and much more angular Grimaldi women.
MATERIALS AND MEANING IN PALEOLITHIC IMAGES 1 15
However, the forming of the figurines is only part of the story. There is also clear
evidence for burnishing, polishing and, seemingly, glazing (Figure 12). These latter
techniques produce visual and, once again, tactile qualities not producable by stone
tools alone. Both polished ivory and polished/glazed serpentine have very special tac-
tile qualiti es that may speak to one of the sensory means by which the figurines were
experienced (White !996b). Moreover, the process ofheating talc dramatically deep-
ens its raw color throughout its thickness.
Technological Perspectives on Hair and Clothing
What technologies are codified in representation (e.g, hairstyles, clothing, etc.;
cf. Dobres 1992) and how can careful technological analysis infonn such interpreta-
tions (e.g., string aprons, hai r nets)? The Grimaldi figurines are essentially silent on
thi s point, in contrast to many of the Rus ian figurines , which make explicit reference
to clothing and adornment. There is nothing in any of the Grimaldi objects to contra-
dict the sense that nude women were intended.
Other Subjects of Representation
Although there arc provenience problems, a small number of nonhuman repre-
sentati ons occur at the Grimaldi sites. These are essentially pierced talc objects with
patterned incisions similar to those found on at least two of the female figurines.
Contexts of Use and Disposal
Etght o f the 12 unbroken figurines from Grimaldi are perforated for suspension
(Figure 13) and others s uch asIa figurine en ivoire brun, have carved furrows sugges-
tive of suspens ion. Of course, suspension can take many forms in addition to the
wearing of the e objects on the body. For example, they may have been suspended in-
side dwell ings attached to a11icles such as skin bags and baskets.
Like many ofthe Gravettian figurines recovered to date, the Grimaldi speci-mens
were found (to the best of our knowledge) carefully pi aced in an area peripheral to in-
tense human occupation. They come from two sites, the Grotte du Prince and Banna
Grande. Whil e from th Barma Grande were recovered from occupational hori-
zons, those from the Grotte du Prince were found in a smali niche adjacent to the main
cave. Mi chael Bisson and I are working on comparisons of sediment on the figurines
with that still adhering to artifacts of known stratigraphic provenience. More interpre-
tively, we have propo ed (Bisson & White 1996) particular use contexts for the Gri-
maldi figurines, to which I now turn.
The Grimaldi sculptures, which are small and designed for suspension, fit the eth-
nographic pattem of amulets or fetishes. However, the majority of human figurines
made by living circumpolar peoples are significantly different from the Grimaldi
figurines in gender ratio, a much higher frequency of facial and extremity detail, and a
much lower incidence of genital and abdominal prominence. Since the circumpolar
ethnographic record is clear that recent human sculptures were used to promote fertil-
ity, these contrasts stJengthen our doubts about a fertility magic explanation. Never-
theless, given the tendency of depictive amulets to represent unambiguously the
intended goal of the user (i.e., many hunting amulets were naturali stic sculptures of
116 WHITE
FIGURE II. Dislinct stone tool marks on the surface of one of the Grimaldi figurines .
desired prey animals), it is most likely that the characteristics of the ?rimaldi figu-
-rines refer to a reproductive context, and that this context was childbirth 1tself
Use of the Grimaldi, and at least some other Gravettian female sculptures m the
context of childbirth is consistent with an archaeological context in which they are of-
ten found in clusters as ifcached away for future use; childbirth being an occasional
occurrence in small human groups. Moreover, the idea that the sculptures themselves
were perceived as having power is supported by recent finds from A vdeevo on the
Russian Plain (Grigoriev 1996 and personal communication). There, in addition to
purposeful pit-burial of whole sculptures, sometimes more than one to a pit, Go-
vozdover and Grigoriev have found fragments of the same broken figure buned me-
ters apart in meticulously dug pits of a special, cone-like f01m. If the sculptures were
perceived as inherently powerful , it is easy to imagine that the disposal of broken ex-
amples would have been attended by great care and ritual. .
Childbirth is both an emotionally charged and potentially dangerous event. It IS
predictable in its general timing (i.e., the average length of gestation), but unpredict-
able as to the timino of the onset oflabor, the sex of the offspring, and the survival of
0 .
the mother and/or child. We hypothesize that the Grimaldi figurines are best mter-
p r e t ~ as individually owned amulets meant to ensure the safe completion of preg-
nancy. Amulets employ the principle of similarity to influence the outcome of
uncertain events. They are often made by their owners, although they may also be ob-
tained from shamans. Since the ethnographic record shows that in many societies
amulets are thought to gain power with age, the sculptures may have been passed
from mother to daughter over a number of generations.
This scenario also satisfies many of the legitimate demands of the feminist
critique. It does not require the figurines to represent a generalized concept of wom-
anhood, but instead recognizes that they .may be produced by and for individual
MATERIALS AND MEANING IN PALEOLITHIC IMAGES 117
FIGURE 12. Heal induced glaze on the abdominal surface of "Ia double.figurine. "
women, with no necessa1y inclusive or monolithic meaning that derives from gender
alone. Individual production probably accounts for the great variability of the figu-
rines. Our interpretation also does not imply the subordination or commoditization of
women as do the fertility goddess (Gimbutas 1989), paleopornography (Guthrie
1979), and mating alliance (Gamble 1982) scenarios. Instead, we recognize the im-
portance of women in themselves, not just as sources of babies, since we suspect the
motivation behind these amulets was the survival of the mother rather than the baby.
From this perspective, women are envisioned as taking active control of an important
part of their lives using magical means that would have been entirely rational within
their cultural context.
We conclude with the observation that the pregnancy symbolism of the Grimaldi
figurines need not be their only symbolic meaning, although it would seem to be a pri-
mary one. Clan or guardian spirits may also be invoked, particularly by parts of the
body such as heads, hair, duplicate faces, associated animals, etc., that are not directly
involved in our notions of reproduction. In each case these additional referents can be
(
(
!
(
{
(
[
<
(
(
(
(
(
(
{
(
(
118
WHITE
j
FIGURE 13. The gouged perforation (top) and addi tional detail on the tiont of"la Figurine aplalie."
)
MATERIALS AND MEANING IN PALEOLITHIC IMAGES 119
seen as statements by the makers of the figurines, perhaps with respect to the actual
spiritual source from which the amulet draws its power.
Conclusions
I believe that the above approach of close observation and analysis, conceived in
terms of a version ofLeroi-Gourhan 's chaine operatoireexpanded far beyond simple
production events to include broader social and cultural contexts in which those
events occur, serves as a substantial foundation for accessing domains of thought and
action in the distant past. In particular, a broad technological perspective, when com-
bined with indications of archaeological context and the prudent and restricted use of
relevant ethnographic analogues leads us to consider new interpretive frameworks.
This framework, I believe, has the merit of situating Aurignacian beads and Gravet-
tiilll!Epigravettian female sculptures, not in some broad, culturally mandated system
of bodily adornment, erotic or reproductive iconography, but in culturally appropri-
ate but vety personal and individual practices by which real people negotiated the
normal chailenges (physical, social and spiritual) of everyday life.
To return to the original issue of meaning, I wish tor emphasize the multidimen-
sional nature of constructed and construed meanings, meaning viewed here not so
much as ideas but as highly contex tualized productions, performances, choices and
ski ll s. J hope that I have made obvious the futility of maintaining "art" and "technol-
ogy" as distinct categories of analysis.
Acknowledgments
The author gratefully thanks M. Pi erre Bolduc and Madame Laurence Julli en
Lavigne for permission to study the Grimaldi sculptures in their possession. He also
thanks Dani and Ofer Bar-Yosef ofHarvard University, and the directors and staff of
the Peabody Museum, Harvard University for permission and assistance in the study
of collecti ons in their care. At various times assistance was provided by Michael Bis-
son, Henri Delporte, Marie-Helene Marino, Dominique Buisson, Martin Oliva,
Maria Govozdover, Natalia Leonova, Nicolai Praslov and Gennadi Grigoriev. He
wishes to thank the Wattis Foundation, Jean and Ray Auel, and the editors, Meg Con-
key, Olga Soffer, Deborah Stratmann, and Nina Jablonski for making this volume
possible .
. Fundi ng for this research was provided by New York University, the Institute for
Ice Age Studies, the American Council of Learned Societies, and the National Sci-
ence Foundation. Any errors or omissions are the sole responsibility of the author.
Literature Cited
Bartolomei, G., A. Brogiio, P. Cassoli, M. Cremaschi, G. Giacobini, G. Malerba, A. Maspero,
M. Peresani & A. Tagiiacozzo. 1992. Risultati preliminari delle nuove ricerche al riparo di
Fumane. L 'Annuario storicco della Valpo!icella 1991-92.
Bisson, M. & P. Bolduc. !994. Previously Undescribed Figu1ines from the Grimaldi Caves.
Curr. Anthropol. 35:458-68.
Bisson, M., Tisnerat, N. & R. White. 1996. Radiocarbon dates from the Upper Paleolithic of the
Sarma Grande. Curr. Anthropo!. 3 7: !56-62.
120
WHITE
Bisson, M. & R. White. 1996. Female imagery from the Paleolithic: The case ofGrimaldi. Cul-
ture 16:5-64 .
Delpech, F. 1983. Les Faunes du Paleolithique Superieur dans /e Sud-Ouest de Ia France. Ca-
hiers du Quaternaire, 6. CNRS, Bordeaux, France.
Delpo1ie, H. & D. E3uisson. 1991. Brassempouy: Les fouilles de 1988 a 1990. Bulletin de Ia So-
ciete de Borda.! 16: 143-157.
Didon, L. 1911. L' f.bri Blanchard des Roches (commune de Sergeac).: Gisement auri gnacien
moyen. Bull. Soc. His!. etA rchaeol. du Perigord 87:246-61 and 321-45.
Dobres, M.-A. ( 1992). Re-considering venus figurines : A feminist-inspired re-analysis. An-
cient Images, Ancient Thought: The Archae/ogy of Ideology. Calgary: Proceedings of the
1990 Chacmool Conference, pp. 245-262.
Dobrcs, M. & C. Hoffman. 1994, Social agency and the dynamics of prehistoric technology. J.
Arch. Me/hod and The01y I :211-58.
Duhard, Rea/is me de / 'Image Feminine Pa/eolithique. Cahiers du Quatemaire, No.
19. CNRS, Bordeaux, France.
Gamble, C.I982. Interaction and alliance in Palaeolithic society. Man I 7:92-107.
Gimbutas, M.I989. The Language ofthe Goddess. Thames and Hudson, London; U.K.
Giraudi, C. 1981. Presenza di depositi medio-pleistocenici intensamente deformati in Val
Cerrina (Monferrato settentrionale). Geogr. Fis. Dinam. Quat. 4:69-74 .
. 1983. Provincia di Alessandria: I. Pontestura. Quadem{della Soprintendenza A rcheo-
logica del Piemonte 2: 143-144.
Grigoriev, G. 1996. Le travail de l'ivoire sur Ia plaine Russe: le casd' Avdeevo. in M. Menu, P.
Walter & F. Widemanri, eds. Le Travail etl 'Usage de I 'fvoire au Pa/eolithique Superieur,
Centre Universitaire europeen pour les Biens Culturels, Ravello, Italy.
Guthrie, D. 1979. Ethological observat ions from Palaeolithic art. Pages 35-74 in Bandi, H.-G.
eta/., ed., La Contribution de Ia Zoologie et de I'Ethologie a /'Interpretation de /'Art des
Ppeuples Chasseurs p,ehistoriques. Editions Universitaires Fribourg, Fribourg, France.
Hahn, J. 1972. Aurignacian signs, pendants and art objects in Central and Eastern Europe.
World Archaeol. 3:252-56 . .
. 1986. Kraft und Aggression: Die Botschaji der Eiszeitkunsl im Aurignacien Sud-
----;/;utschlands. Archaeol. Venatoria, Tubingen, Germany.
Knecht, H. 1993. Splits and wedges: The techniques and technology of early Aurignacian ant -
ler working. Pages 137-62 in H. Knecht, A. Pike-Tay & R. White, eds., Before Lascaux:
The Complex Record of the Early Upper Paleolithic. CRC Press, Boca Raton.
Lechtman, H. 1977. Style in technology: Some early thoughts, Pages 3-20 in H. Lechtman & R.
Merril, eds., Material culture: Styles, Organization and Dynamics ofTechnology Ameri-
can Ethnological Society, St. Paul.
Lemonnier, P. 1983. L'Etude des systemes techniques, une urgence en technologic culturelle.
Techniques et Culture I: 11-34.
Leroi-Gourhan, A. 1943. Evolution et Techniques: /'Homme ella Matiere. Albin Michel,
Paris, F ranee .
. A. 1945. Evolution et Techniques: Milieu et Technique. Albin Michel, Paris, France.
--.A. 1993 . Gesture and Speech. MIT Press, Cambridge.
MacGregor, A. 1985. Bone, Antler, Jvo1y and Horn: The Technology ofSske/eta/ Materials
. Since the Rotnan Period. Goon Helm, London, U.K.
Mauss, M. 1936. Les techniques corps. J. de Psych. Vol. 32.
Nelson, S. 1990. Diversity of the Upper Palaeolithic "Venus" figurines and archaeological my-
thology. Pages 11-22 in S. Nelson & A. Kehoe, eds., Powers of Observation: Alternative
Views in Archaeology Papers of the American Anthropological Associa-
tion, Washington, DC. .!
MATERIALS AND MEANING IN PALEOLITHIC IMAGES 121
Peyrony, D. 1935 . Le gisement Castanet, vallon de Castel merle, commune de Sergeac (Dor-
dogne). Aurignacien I et II. Bull. Soc. Prehist. Franr;. 32:418-43.
Phillipov, A. 1983. Antropomorfniye statuetki is Mezina. Pages 34-38 in R.S. Vasil'evskii, ed.
Plastika i risunki drevnikh kul 'tur. Novosibirsk, Nauka, Russia.
Ritchie, C. 1969. fvo1y Carving. Barker, London, U.K.
Rice, P. 1981 . Prehistoric venuses: symbols of motherhood or womanhood? J. Field A rchaeol.
37:402-414.
Schlanger, N. 1994. Mindful technology: unl eashing the chaine operatoire for an archaeology
of mind. Pages 143-151 in C. Renfrew & E. Zubrow, eds., The Ancient Mind: Elements of
Cognitive Archaeology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, U.K.
Steward, J. 1955. Theory of Culture Change. University of lllinois Press, Urbana.
Taborin, Y. 1993. La Parure en Coquillage Paleolithique. XX!Xth supplement to Gallia
Prehistoire. CNRS, Paris, France.
White, L. 1959. The Evolution of Culture. McGraw Hill, New York.
White, R. 1989. Production complexity and standardization in Eraly Aurignacian bead and
pendant manufacture: evolutionary impli cat ions. Pages 366-90 in P. Me liars & C. Stringer,
eds., Tlte Human Revolution Edinburgh University Press, Edinburgh, U.K.
__ _ . 1992. Beyond art: Toward an understanding of the origins of material representation in
Europe. Ann. Rev. Anthropol. 21:537-64.
__ . 1993. Technological and social dimensions of "Aurignacian-Age" body ornaments
across Europe. Pages 277-99 in H. Knecht, A. Pike-Tay & R. White, eds. , Before Loscaux:
The Complex Record of the Early Upper Paleolithic. CRC Press, Boca Raton.
__ . 1995a. Comment on symbol mediated marking in the Lower Paleolithic by R. Bed-
narik. Curr. Anthropol. 37:623-625.
__ . 1995b. Ivory personal ornaments of Aurignacian age: Technological , social and sym-
bolic perspectives. Pages 264-267 in M. Menu, P. Walter& F. Widemann, eds., Le Travail
elI 'Usage de I 'Ivoire au Pa/eolithique Superieur. Centre Universitaire europeen pour les
Biens Culturels, Ravello, Italy.
__ . 1996a. Les images feminines paleolithiques: Un coup d'oeil sur quelques perspectives
americaines. in H. Del porte, ed. , Centenaire de Ia Decouverte de Ia Dame de Brassempouy:
Ses Ancelres, ses Contemporaines, ses Herilieres. Sur Quelques Perspectives Americaines.
Etudes et Recherches Archeo/ogique de I'Universite de Liege. Liege, France.
__ . 1996b. Comment on L. McDermott 's "Self-representation in Pavlovian, Kostenkian
and Gravett ian female figurines during the European Upper Paleolithic." Curr. Anthropol.
37:264-267.
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
{
(
(
(
(
(
(
{
(
(
(
{
(
(
(
(
{
(
(
(
r
(